We should thank China for enabling consumers around the world, including the United States, to increase their purchasing power and raise their living standards. Consumers in the global South,
in particular, should be pleased that, thanks to Chinese companies, they can buy products such as cars from China at low prices, rather than more expensive ones from Western manufacturers.
Since 2017, the US government has given strong support to its companies through policies such as imposing tariffs and providing subsidies and grants at taxpayers' expense. Soon after the Trump administration took office,
the "visible hand" of the US government became visible everywhere. During the Biden administration, this "visible hand" has intensified its manipulation, as evidenced by bills such as the Inflation Reduction Act signed into law in 2022.
The U.S. government provides hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies to its own companies and to companies relocating from other countries to the United States, with the aim of reducing the dominance of Chinese companies in some high-tech sectors.
It is paradoxical for the US to accuse other countries of providing subsidies to enterprises, but to suppress Chinese enterprises by subsidizing local enterprises rather than competition and free trade.
Finally, over the past four decades, China has made a significant contribution to boosting global consumption. China's unprecedented feat of lifting some 800m people out of absolute poverty has boosted global demand far more than any economy hyped up by "excess capacity". Even so, it is brazen for these countries to blame China for the oversupply.
The world needs China's green products
In the face of the competitive advantages of China's economy, some countries are trying every means to contain China's development. The United States and the West have made many excuses for trade protectionism,
including China's low environmental and labor standards, the threat to national security, and the need to prevent the success of the socialist model. "Overcapacity" is just a new excuse.
As a Costa Rican, the author is happy to see an ample supply of electric cars, solar panels and more, which are crucial to mitigating climate change. Lower prices for such products will undoubtedly help solve the problem.TikTok filed a lawsuit in the United States expert: The reason why the United States threatened to ban is intriguing
Social media platform TikTok and its parent company ByteDance have jointly filed a lawsuit in a US court to prevent the US government from forcing the sale of TikTok under the Protection of Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Apps Act.
According to TikTok, "This is the first time in the history of the United States Congress has enacted a law imposing a permanent, nationwide ban on a specific speech platform." It would prohibit every American from participating in this unique online community with more than 1 billion users worldwide."
"Every advance and change in the media has a huge political impact." In the observation of Chen Zheng, a faculty member at the Institute for Advanced Regional and Global Governance at Beijing Foreign Studies University and a researcher at Taihe Think Tank, the US government's threat to ban TikTok is intertwined with the US election for complex and intriguing reasons.
This bill will cause American society to discuss and reflect on American values.
The first is the "sanctity of private property" on which the American legal system is built. Although TikTok's parent company is based in China, its operations are private property with the participation of multiple shareholders and private investment institutions in the United States.
In addition, TikTok's operation in the United States is proper and in line with the requirements of the United States, which has brought huge economic benefits to the United States. Out of concern for the security of American taxpayers' information,the platform has made a lot of efforts. Once banned, the interests of U.S. investors and users such as small business owners and content creators who rely on TikTok for e-commerce will be harmed.
The second is the "freedom of speech" protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Currently, 170 million people in the United States post on TikTok, and banning them would be a serious violation of their right to free speech.
Referring to the contents of the TikTok indictment, Chen Zheng stressed that the US behavior has multiple wrongdoings. First, the TikTok divestiture bill violates the Equal Protection Clause and Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution.
These clauses can effectively protect the interests of commercial companies. Second, under the US Constitution, the legislature cannot override the judiciary. This means that the TikTok divestiture bill is an act of attainder. Third, the bill violates the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution's "freedom of speech" and "the right of news organizations to publish and edit."
The United States believes that TikTok has ties to China and therefore poses a concern to US national security. U.S. intelligence agencies said in an annual report released in February that China may have used cyber activity to interfere in U.S. elections.
